Analysis Collaboration Topics

(E) Improve Impact Evaluation Tools: (a) Economic Development, (b) Energy Security, (c) Environmental Impacts, (d) all three.

Improve impact evaluation tools and best practices to quantify benefits: (a) economic development, (b) energy security, and (c) environmental impacts, including integration of all three.

Topic collaborators are currently working on implementation plans, based on the workshop discussions — please watch these pages for updates. You can also find out more about the initiative participants on the collaborators page.

Activity No. 1 – Model inventory and best practices and identify strengths/limitations

Activity Update (January 2007) -

Skip Laitner held a workshop in November 2006 on Energy and Economic Policy Models. Other activities included:

• A plan for completing an inventory is now being discussed among workshop participants including representatives from ACEEE, Tufts University, the Pew Climate Center, and Redefining Progress, and the Center for the Applied Study of Economics & the Environment, among others.
• Preliminary estimates indicate that the effort will require an estimated $75,000 to complete both the model inventory and a modeling guide for policy makers.
• Both the inventory and the policy guide will include references to these three policy issues. We anticipate this work to be completed within about 6 months once fully funded.

Activity Update (December 2006) -

With a number of successful outcomes from the November 2006 workshop on Energy and Economic Policy Models, a plan for completing this inventory is now being discussant among workshop participants including representatives from ACEEE, Tufts University, the Pew Climate Center, and Redefining Progress, and the Center for the Applied Study of Economics & the Environment, among others. Preliminary estimates indicate that the effort will require an estimated $75,000 to complete both the model inventory and a modeling guide for policy makers. Both the inventory and the policy guide will include references to these three policy issues. We anticipate this work to be completed within about 6 months once fully funded.

Activity Overview

• Goal: Create an inventory of models used for impacts analysis
• Current related activities:
  • Lots of models are being used – DOE-EIA/NEMS, EPA/MARKAL, states use NEMS and IPM
  • Michael Leifman's Renewable Energy Modeling Forum is good place to start
  • Jim Sweney (Stanford) put together 1990 assessment of current state of energy modeling, as part of National Energy Strategy under Admiral Watkins (Policy Office/EIA)
  • AMIGA model looks at petroleum refiners
• Next steps: Create an inventory of models used for impacts analysis to cover (a) economic development, (b) energy security, and (c) environmental impacts
• Lead: ACEEE – Skip Laitner
• Participants: University of California, EPA, DOT, DOE, USDA, FERC, RTOs, HUD, PMAs

Activity No. 2 – Full Accounting of Impacts

Activity Update (January 2007) -

Skip Laitner authored a paper, "Improving the Contribution of Economic Models in Evaluating Oil Transition and Climate Change Mitigation Policies," that identifies a set of four different areas of needed improvement and offers suggested ways to handle these issues within economic models.

Together with Argonne National Laboratory's Donald Hanson, Laitner also coauthored an article for the Energy Journal, "Modeling Detailed Energy Efficiency Technologies and Technology Policies" within a CGE Framework. ACEEE is planning a series of working papers to be posted as an extension of ACEEE's modeling Web site.

Activity Update (December 2006)

The highly successful November 2006 workshop provided an important step in this direction. For more information on this event, see the ACEEE Web site.

ACEEE's Skip Laitner authored a paper, "Improving the Contribution of Economic Models in Evaluating Oil Transition and Climate Change Mitigation Policies," that identifies a set of four different areas of needed improvement and offers suggested ways to handle these issues within economic models. That paper can be downloaded from ACEEE's modeling website. Together with Argonne National Laboratory's Donald Hanson, Laitner coauthored an article for the Energy Journal, "Modeling Detailed Energy-Efficiency Technologies and Technology Policies" within a CGE Framework. This appeared in a recent 2006 special issue on so-called hybrid-CGE models. Finally, ACEEE is planning a series of working papers to be posted as an extension of the modeling website referenced above. This work will begin to be available electronically in early 2007.

Activity Overview

• Goal: Develop methodologies to account for all of the impacts of a program or project, that goes beyond just the cost and the resulting energy savings
• Current related activities:
  • Lots of activities to quantify costs and energy savings – what about activities to quantify energy security, environment, health impacts, etc.?
  • Risk and consistent treatment of technology goals (different levels of technology optimism). Look at GWU site; they are using Delphi approach to examine
• Next steps:
  • Create a white paper, detailing current approaches to quantifying impacts analyses and pointing out the best practices, and areas where more analysis is needed.
  • Develop a workshop for Best Practices in Impact Evaluation
    • Identify potential sponsors and participants
    • Hold in the fall/winter of 2006
  • Create a collective website to share information (similar to Wikipedia)
• Lead: ACEEE – Skip Laitner, NREL
• Participants: University of California, EPA, DOT, DOE, USDA, FERC, RTOs, HUD, PMAs

Activity No. 3 – Define Appropriate Relationships of Economic Parameters in Models

Activity Update (January 2007) -

Skip Laitner authored a paper, "Improving the Contribution of Energy Models." in which he identified a series of critical economic factors impacting modeling results.

The group held a workshop in November 2006 that provided a number of links and potential collaborations that are beginning to result of more concerted efforts to both identify these critical economic factors and suggested specific data sources and model algorithms that might enable the appropriate implementation in economic policy models.

A more complete work plan and inventory will be available through ACEEE in Spring 2007.

Activity Update (December 2006) -

In his paper, "Improving the Contribution of Energy Models," ACEEE's Skip Laitner identified a series of critical economic factors impacting modeling results. Moreover, the November 2006 workshop provided a number of links and potential collaborations that are beginning to result of more concerted efforts to both identify these critical economic factors and suggested specific data sources and model algorithms that might enable the appropriate implementation in economic policy models. A more complete workplan and inventory will be available through ACEEE in Spring 2007.

Activity Overview

• Goal: In many models, there is not always an appropriate relationship between economic parameters. This should be tested and corrected wherever possible
• Current related activities:
  • Lots of models are being used – DOE-EIA/NEMS, EPA/MARKAL, states use NEMS and IPM
  • Michael Leifman's Renewable Energy Modeling Forum is good place to start
• Next steps:
  • Assess relationship of critical economic factors used in models
    • Identify key relationships
    • Insure relationships make sense (e.g. price signal like carbon charge means prices go up and should have negative impact on GDP)
    • Check that feedbacks work as they should
  • Hold a best practices workshop to explore economic parameter relationships and models
• Lead: ACEEE – Skip Laitner
• Participants: University of California, EPA, DOT, DOE, USDA, FERC, RTOs, HUD, PMAs

Activity No. 4 – Validate Results of Evaluation Tools

• Goal: Evaluation tools may not yield appropriate results if they use faulty methodology – therefore they must be validated
• Current related activities: TBD
• Next steps:
  • Building upon the model inventory (Activity #1), identify the models that need validation
  • For these, develop appropriate validation method
  • Conduct validation exercise
• Lead: NEEDS LEADER
• Participants: TBD

Printable Version